Most people are in a state of disbelief as to where concurrently the American state of mind resolves.

We have some basic postures to hold - a basic need some for a blotter of the pressing cores.

What follows here as raised should parse through as not contradictory however seeming contrary.

The preparatory stages have gone missing to now easily garnering “COMPASSIONATE ORIGINALISM” rye!

You may prefer to start with Donald J. Trump and on foreign policy but to get there we do require an open mind collectively to now getting to appreciating that in 1993 William J. Clinton first steps in the Middle East with Gulf Countries was erred & too slick.

To tolerate the promise of Donald J. Trump we must cotton now very lately to a mirage has been long affected to keep Americans from seeing and measuring the scope of how wrong William J. Clinton was, and, how by being that wrong how he did set up by its scope and breadth so much so many so long have falsely and ignorantly yet partied vastly to a blaming just his successor/successors.

It is imaginable that Donald J. Trump is already getting past that of the campaign postures his on George W. Bush of the Iraq War as wrong was wrong. Let me be clear: Donald J. Trump at least was wrong on that George W. Bush was wrong.

And how: To understand this postured posit one may need to find some works of a proffered that can also attest that due that William J. Clinton first steps in 1993 on the Middle East were horrible so much isn’t understood and to that Donald J. Trump understanding is still also as uninformed by the shenanigans of Clintons’ smoke and mirrors and #BlameAndGo projection and outright misrepresentations of reality.

A good turn of phrase for such a diabolical political reality is of use of “alternative facts” to cover quite “lying” by Clintons.

But really this if of such as these of issues for a blotter to be kept until a thorough prosecution against general ignorance is accomplished.

On the art of “COMPASSIONATE ORIGINALISM” we are to deal of the real - even to entitlements are illegal.

William J. Clinton cannot stand as a hero - even a good figure politically historically!

William J. Clinton cannot abide an honest or structural presentation of events in history as to a gestalt of history through an apparently worked by seeing how the pieces move and culminate to actions having reactions and outcomes indivisible from the events when not over-lorded as if a telling of a legal turn of phrase could make any is and is not that is.

Donald J. Trump is at risk of making the same mistakes George W. Bush made if he does now also not address the reality - the real - the deeper scope of such of so much that went wrong started wrong when William J. Clinton made bad and horrible wrong first moves so with the Gulf Countries of the Middle East.

The primal constitutional core relates with: William J. Clinton’s Iraq policies did violate the First Amendment; - George W. Bush Iraq War was Constitutional and respectful of Islam and Muslims generally for the United States Constitution is under “our Lord” and to a Peoples’ Order constituted to allegiance pledged for due process.

At this point I join you to be braced by the Constitution for the Constitution as the Peoples’ Order originally ordained.

Grammar of an order - especially such so important and enduring as the “People” of their “Order” that formed the Union a confederate republic - is now where we best test ourselves with a probative and open consideration of the structured as written.

Please now coax yourselves away from how wrongly long coaxed to mislead and poorly instructed on the real Constitution.

The Liberal’s want has been to claim long that the preamble is not Law and that God is not in the Constitution.

WRONG!!! WRONG!!! WRONG!!! WRONG!!!

The preamble is the key the legend to the Peoples’ Order such as set on any map for reality in cartography; - the preamble is Law by greater than Law as by the diction and emphasis and with otherwise odd grammar used to key that there is a Peoples’ Order by the “do ordain and establish” with it critical for comprehending of “Order” is capitalized due a noun emphasized.

What really gets the Liberals goat is that the First Amendment can be used against them and to proof and ignorance and wrong reading comprehension - like always; - the First Amendment grammar, like all amendments, must be consistent to the use and diction and emphasis in that being amended; - the Liberals are inconvenienced by the reality that “do ordain and establish” preceded “no law respecting an establishment of religion” usage.

Consider: As the preamble uses “do ordain and establish” of the Peoples’ “Order” “done” “subscribed” in “Year of our Lord” by the time one gets to that the Bill of Rights first alteration presents of “establishment” of “an establishment” not “the establishment” or “Establishment” it becomes a conundrum a mystery of faith of sorts for how structured and emphasized all the while the preamble use capitalization for Posterity, Tranquility, and mixed so of “general Welfare” of the ordained and established.

To be brief but a trigger for a coaxing from the coaxed to improper and ignorant comprehension let us mix in that Donald J. Trump, Sr. is closer to the truth while yet wrong on the Iraq War for it hasn’t been fielded or worked through of how William J. Clinton errs on Middle East were grossly horrible and to much set asunder quite tragically by how Clintons are still as then wrong on ORIGINALISM and so blind to the new Republican Movement effected to the new “COMPASSIONATE ORIGINALISM” now being tweeted as regards what right and proper governance.

It gets more complicated likewise by reading, however coaxed, to the correct and proper reading of that the founding fathers’ work was not a work for secular SOCIALISM and so a work in BLASPHEMY; - by reading the First Amendment correctly of by that “establishment” is as “an establishment” and not “Establishment” or “the Establishment” there is that the use to consistent to the body of the constituted better reads of “establishment” as meaning any tenet/tenets of religion.

Here is where the mystery a conundrum become interesting and of that some thought rightly that the Bill of Rights was not necessary; - such fits perfectly with the view that the Bill of Rights is redundant and unnecessary for as it of “do ordain and establish…” we are set under our Lord and Lord’s Law as to reign to that each to know their rights of that each is endowed to defend themselves from any violate of the Ten Commandments against them, and especially if a government - any tyranny.

Yes, it simply figures that the Iraq War and George W. Bush of standing with Iraqi liberated peoples was being Constitutional and prudent in standing with their attempt to write a constitution yet a better constitution still on shared principles to be garnered with a true and correct reading.

The founding fathers were not, it seems, even at all disposed to the Peoples’ Order as a work in BLASPHEME and BLASPHEMY - such is not in their historic character still.

To wrap for a brevity let me be clear but brief: The Bill of Rights as ratified of ten do stand quite similar to the Ten Commandments for basically instructs forward that of each is of endowed rights to defend from any, even a government, violate of Lord’s Laws against them. But to offer a proofed to clarity may need more coaxing of yourselves from how long coaxed to a cloaking of the right and correct meanings. Consider that “establishments” of meaning tenets then does better set up and understanding for the amendments 1-10 by leaves to states any law making as regards sin and Lord’s Law jurisdiction; - consider as “establishment” must be consistent to “do ordain and establish” there is that “respecting” is outta place by a “re…” word belongeth not in an amendment unless a spectacle likewise relates as establish prior in the body.

Let me be clear: Taking the First Amendment as “respecting an establishment” reads best as eitherwise as “make no law to change/alter Lord’s Law - the spectacle - the spectacle of the founding fathers work as an apostolic spectacle in cliche.

The founding fathers and how the First Amendment is coy and mysterious is guidance to that they held their efforts as akin an “apostolic spectacle” and respected that of the spectacle of the realm of law of in the Lord’s eyes; - as it reads so the First Amendment partly establishes that entitlements, consistent to the EMOLUMENTS CLAUSE, are not legal for if none can be “titled” none are to be “entitled”.

Work with Alexander Hamilton through this reasoned erudite postured by keeping to FEDERALIST PAPERS #1 by “Publius” as to affirming entitlements to be such a foreign concept to reasonably illegal by that it is by second paragraph leading we are still to learn of that the Peoples’ Order is of the constitution as for “INDUCEMENTS OF PHILANTHROPY” and as worked through to conclusion as critically to as for “PRESERVATION… OF PROPERTY” written, published, circulated.

The separation of church and state is better defined by George Washington’s famous letter to the Jews of Newport, Rhode Island!

The separation of church and states works, coincidentally, quite the same as by how wrongly long coaxed to mistaught and unlearned by that of “no law respecting an establishment of religion” as to Congress shall not change the Lord’s Laws and of the separation as vertical of that no one individual is to be ever seen as a politician of a government as of an interpretation - any re-spectacled to that set at least as sins and of the Ten Commandments.

The inconvenient truth for Liberals is that by reading the Constitution and Bill of Rights correctly much stays the same except for that SOCIALISM and ENTITLEMENTS are now still illegal and however as barred as protected from since before such were ever new names for old considerations MACHIAVELLIAN, even.

William J. Clinton did much damage that we now must uncloak and coax masses from being ignorant as regards reality for the realness to the real to face Donald J. Trump now necessitates this interpretation reigns supreme for it, like as set in the “LETTER TO THE JEWS” does preposition the nation for better TOLERANCE and a social conscience that is our old prophylactic even to Islam ideals short of barbarism perversions.

Again the constituted ratified simple common sense is not of a supposed upon the founders of founding as an act and order in BLASPHEMY; - read forward: Congress shall make no law to change Lord’s Law for that is by at least the Bill of Rights as prudently kept secured to localities and of states’ rights; - if it pertains to sins and the Ten Commandments it is not the jurisdiction of the federal government a confederate republic - but for collective protections from groups domestic and foreign organized against the shared united interests of the constituted under our Lord before under any government Americans.

It is keeping it real to coax you to a however very late consideration of that George W. Bush Iraq War was Constitutional and necessary at least because William J. Clintons entire eight years carried ruinous forward of his first steps were WRONG and to of to their core of that the Clinton Iraq policies did violate the Constitution - even the First Amendment though redundant.

When you get near to it it shall likely boggle your mind how much Liberals have been wrong for “establishment of religion” as meaning “tenets of religion” fit to the of “do ordain and establish” and to that so much was always just necessarily supposed to stay of powers as left to the states and their peoples’ “local”!

Likewise of brevity: There shall be no federal entitlements for such violates the states rights to build communities - moral communities?